From: Sam S. <sd...@gn...> - 2004-10-27 18:17:29
|
> * Bruno Haible <oe...@py...t> [2004-10-27 19:48:33 +0200]: > > Sam wrote: >> > 2. does it include _all_ known gc-safety fixes? >> > I can try running a DEBUG_GCSAFETY binary - except that it takes the >> > -O binary 1.5 hours to crash, so it will take the DEBUG_GCSAFETY >> > binary days. >> >> DEBUG_GCSAFETY does not work on x86_64: > > You don't need it absolutely. it would still be nice to have. See also https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=981623&group_id=1355&atid=101355 > From the fact that you could load 5 GB of data before the thing > crashed, I guess it's either a low-probability GC crash that you best > debug in an image built with -g but without -DDEBUG_SPVW. how do _I_ debug a GC crash without -DDEBUG_SPVW?! Bruno, you are talking to _me_, not your clone! :-) > Or something related to an unexpected 2GB or 4GB limit somewhere. HUH?!!! -- Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k <http://www.camera.org> <http://www.iris.org.il> <http://www.memri.org/> <http://www.mideasttruth.com/> <http://www.honestreporting.com> Never succeed from the first try - if you do, nobody will think it was hard. |